OBJECTIVETo study difference in curative effect between intermingled skin transplantation (IT) and microskin grafting (MG) in repairing massive deep burn.

METHODSClinical materials of 101 patients with massive deep burn hospitalized from 1992 to 2008 were retrospectively summarized. Patients were divided into IT group (n = 52) and MG group (n = 49). The size of initial donor site for autologous skin, the wound size initially covered with autologous skin, the survival rate of initial autologous skin grafting, the theoretical expansion multiple of the autologous skin, the actual expansion multiple of the autologous skin, the total size of donated autologous skin, the remained wound condition, and the function of large joint of patients in two groups were compared.

RESULTSIn IT group and MG group, the size of initial donor site for autologous skin was respectively (3.25 +/- 0.48)%TBSA and (3.01 +/- 0.21)%TBSA, the wound size initially covered by autologous skin was respectively (30.4 +/- 3.6)%TBSA and (41.4 +/- 1.3)%TBSA, the survival rate of autologous skin grafting was respectively (99.9 +/- 1.9)% and (87.5 +/- 6.8)%, the theoretical expansion multiple of the autologous skin was respectively 9.5 +/- 1.3 and 13.9 +/- 1.4, the actual expansion multiple of the autologous skin was respectively 9.5 +/- 1.3 and 12.0 +/- 1.5, the difference between two figures of each index was statistically significant (P < 0.05). There was no statistical significant difference between IT and MG group in respect of the total size of donated autologous skin [respectively (14.2 +/- 1.9) and (14.0 +/- 2.1)%TBSA, P > 0.05]. There were 23 patients (44.2%) with residual wounds over 0.5%TBSA in IT group, and 37 cases (75.5%) in MG group. There were 34 patients (65.4%) with good function of large joints in IT group, and 18 cases (36.7%) in MG group.

CONCLUSIONSExpansion multiple of autologous skin after MG is obviously larger than that after IT, thus limited skin source can be fully used. The wound healing quality and the restoration of large joint function of patients treated with IT are better than those of patients treated with MG.